-
Ecosystem Services xxx (2018) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Ecosystem Services
journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /ecoser
Can multifunctional livelihoods including recreational
ecosystemservices (RES) and non timber forest products (NTFP)
maintainbiodiverse forests in the Brazilian Amazon?
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.0162212-0416/� 2018
Published by Elsevier B.V.
⇑ Corresponding author at: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais,
Departamentode Cartografia, Centro de Sensoriamento Remoto,
Programa de Pós-Graduação emAnálise e Modelagem Sistemas
Ambientais, Instituto de Geociências, Av. AntônioCarlos, 6627, Belo
Horizonte - MG Brazil, CEP 31270-900, Brazil. Tel.: +55 31
34095449; fax: +55 31 3409 5410.
E-mail addresses: [email protected],
[email protected] (S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro).
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifunctional livelihoods including recreational
ecosystem services (RES) atimber forest products (NTFP) maintain
biodiverse forests in the Brazilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services
(2018), https://doi.org/10ecoser.2018.03.016
Sónia M. Carvalho Ribeiro a,⇑, Britaldo Soares Filho a, William
Leles Costa b, Laura Bachi c,Amanda Ribeiro de Oliveira b, Patricia
Bilotta d, Allaoua Saadi e, Elaine Lopes c, Tim O’Riordan
f,Humberto Lôbo Pennacchio g, Lúcio Queiroz h, Susanna Hecht i,
Raoni Rajão j, Ubirajara Oliveira k,Carlos Cioce Sampaio l
aUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Departamento de
Cartografia, Centro de Sensoriamento Remoto, Programa de
Pós-Graduação em Análise e Modelagem SistemasAmbientais, Instituto
de Geociências, Belo Horizonte, BrazilbUniversidade Federal de
Minas Gerais, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Centro de
Sensoriamento Remoto, Instituto de Geociências, Belo Horizonte,
BrazilcUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Programa de
Pós-Graduação em Análise e Modelagem Sistemas Ambientais, Instituto
de Geociências, Belo Horizonte, BrazildUniversidade Positivo,
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Gestão Ambiental, Curitiba,
BrazileUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Departamento de
Geografia, Instituto de Geociências, Belo Horizonte,
BrazilfUniversity of East Anglia, School of Environmental Sciences
Norwich, UKgCompanhia Nacional de Abastecimento CONAB, Brasilia,
BrazilhUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Instituto Ciências
Biológicas, Belo Horizonte, Brazili The Graduate Institute Geneva,
Graduate Institute of International Development Studies, Genève,
SwitzerlandjUniversidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Escola
Engenharia, Belo Horizonte, BrazilkUniversidade Federal de Minas
Gerais, Centro de Sensoriamento Remoto, Programa de Pós-Graduação
em Análise e Modelagem Sistemas Ambientais, Instituto Geociências,
BeloHorizonte, BrazillUniversidade Regional de Blumenau, Programa
de Pós-Graduação em Desenvolvimento Regional, Blumenau, Brasil;
Universidade Positivo, Programa de Pós-Graduação em
GestãoAmbiental, Curitiba, Brazil
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:Received 30 June 2017Received in revised form 17
March 2018Accepted 20 March 2018Available online xxxx
Keywords:Community based tourismExtractivist landscapesNon
timber forest productsEcosystem services mappingSustainable
livelihood valuationBrazilian Amazon
a b s t r a c t
In this paper we use large scale spatially explicit modelling
and case study based analyses to assess thelinks between
recreational ecosystem services and the benefits for wellbeing of
traditional livelihoods inthe Brazilian Amazon. Our results show
that, at the scale of the Brazilian Amazon, associations
betweenrecreational ecosystem services and extractivist activities
of Brazil nut and rubber are very weak with nosignificant
differences regarding Brazil nut (p = 0.61) and rubber (p = 0.41)
income across the differenttourism development classes. However,
qualitative analysis of the case studies reveals that where
thereare multifunctional livelihoods, recreational ecosystem
services are indeed helping to enhance non tim-ber forest product
extractivist social values that otherwise would be suppressed by
prevailing ‘‘cattleranching” lifestyles. We therefore support
innovative ways to make both recreational ecosystem servicesand non
timber forest products extraction not merely a juxtaposition of
activities, but integrated intomultifunctional livelihoods.
� 2018 Published by Elsevier B.V.
1. Introduction
Although there has been considerable effort to map and
valueecosystem services from the Amazon, such as carbon,
biodiversity,and water regulation services, the contribution of
recreationalecosystems services (RES) has not received so much
attention(Balvanera et al., 2012). There is, however, a widespread
belief thatcarefully planned RES, if related to the natural,
cultural and socialsignificance of Amazon forests, are indeed
important both for those
nd non.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/22120416http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecoserhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
2 S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx
undertaking recreation experiences in the biggest tropical
forest inthe world, and for the wellbeing of the traditional
communities liv-ing in the Amazon. RES are able to develop local
eco-socio-economies and socio-productive arrangements with the
potentialto contribute to the sustainable development of the
Amazon(Sampaio, 2005). Challenging this widespread belief,
Hoefle(2016) argued that there is little potential for tourism to
fostermultifunctional livelihoods, and consequently concluded
that‘‘tourism will not save the Amazon forests”. However, we
arguethat the linkages among the extractivist activities associated
withnon timber forest products (NTFP) and RES particularly in the
formof community based tourism (CBT) still need to be fully
addressed,explored and mapped. There is thus a need for examining
caseswhere there is (or where not) a multifunctional link across
thosetwo activities in the diversity of socio ecological systems in
theBrazilian Amazon.
The Amazon forest is well known for its hostile
environment,humidity, plagues and diseases that hinder tourism
developmentand the consequent capturing of RES. The Amazon is also
a hotspotof biodiversity, holding rich cultural heritage, which can
provideunique recreational opportunities. For example, ecotourism
hasproved successful in Madre de Dios Department of Peru (Kirkbyet
al., 2010). A body of research has shown that a niche of mediumto
high class tourists are looking for leisure experiences not
onlyassociated with ‘‘nature”. Critically they also seek contact
with tra-ditional communities, aiming at ‘‘absorbing” local
cultures, eatinglocal food, and experiencing locally-produced
knowledge and tra-ditions (Sampaio and Coriolano, 2009; Sampaio,
2005). Communitybased tourism (CBT) is able to provide such
recreational experi-ences. CBT has evolved from well-known tourism
experiences suchas cultural tourism, ethnotourism, ecotourism and
agrotourism(Sampaio and Coriolano, 2009; Sampaio, 2005). What
distinguishesCBT from other types of tourism is that in CBT
‘‘entrepreneurs” arepeople inspired by communitarian ideologies.
According to Brazil-ian Law1, traditional communities include
indigenous tribes,‘‘quilombolas”, extractivists, and small
agroforestry farmers. In Bra-zil, there are about 234 indigenous
groups encompassing over605,518 families occupying an approximate
area of 106 million ha,plus 54 000 extractivist families living in
12 million ha of extractivereserves (MMA, 2009).
For centuries, these traditional communities have used andtraded
raw materials from the surrounding forests as part of
theirlivelihoods (Levis et al., 2017; Scoles and Gribel, 2015).
Extractivistlandscapes can offer tourists a diversified portfolio
of ‘‘local” foodand drinks, of which the anti-oxidant açai, the
revigoratingcupuaçu and guaraná, and the exquisite Amazon fish
pirarucu arebut few examples. In addition, the Amazon’s cultural
traditionsprovide an important contribution to RES. Appreciating
particularcultural experiences, such as sensing the landscape
identity of dif-ferent socio-cultural groups (e.g. rubber tappers),
as an element oftraditional ecological knowledge of the Amazon
forest (Gomes,2009; Gomes et al., 2012) is one example here.
Amazonianmythologies, such as listening to the legendary story of
the pinkdolphin ‘‘boto” believed to be the father of all single
mothers’ chil-dren, or the particular visions of the Santo Daime
sect in Acre, areimportant learning experiences for tourists and
native peoplesalike. NTFP extractivist activities and RES,
particularly CBT, cantherefore contribute to the multifunctional
use of native forests.These synergies link provisioning (collection
of NTFP) and cultural(landscape identity, recreation) ecosystem
services (ES). As such,they are not a juxtaposition of activities
that occur in parallel
1 Programa Nacional de Desenvolvimento Sustentável dos Povos e
ComunidadesTradicionais (PNPCT) N 6040, 7 Fevereiro 2007.
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
(Hoefle, 2016). They need to be explored as a basis for
multifunc-tional livelihoods.
Despite decades of analyses regarding the role of NTFP in
sus-taining traditional livelihoods, as well as in reducing
deforestation,controversies as to their viability remain (Hecht,
2013; Homma,2008; Humphries et al., 2012; Peters et al., 1989).
Traditionalextractivist activities, such as rubber tapping, have
been discontin-ued or are progressively declining (Gomes et al.,
2012; Hecht,2013; Jaramillo-Giraldo et al., 2017). To enhance
livelihoods asso-ciated with NTFP, the primary policy lies in
incentivising productmarket chains. The ‘‘products” of extractivist
landscapes areregarded in Brazil as outputs of sociobiodiversity
(MMA, 2009).The problem is that, even though government guarantees
a mini-mum price for these products, in some areas there is no
market(no traders of NTFP). To make matters worse, the market
pricesoffered at the international ‘‘commodity” market do not
rewardextractivists either economically or socially, as there are
stillunbalanced power relations in the market chains of NTFP
(Hecht,2013). Furthermore, the services provided by non-market
culturalattributes, as well as traditional ecological knowledge
have not yetbeing properly valued and included into decision
making. Evenwith support from public policies, the values from NTFP
extrac-tivist activities have been decreasing. As a result, a
cattle ranching‘‘ideology” has prevailed, profoundly transforming
traditionalAmazon livelihoods (Gomes, 2009; Gomes et al., 2012).
The cattleranching lifestyle, which generates higher rents, is
culturallyentrenched in the frontier regions of the Brazilian
Amazon(Bowman et al., 2012) (average annual rents per ha of cattle
ranch-ing, intensive and extensive systems, range from USD 80 to
USD500, respectively see
http://csr.ufmg.br/pecuaria/pdf/contexto.pdf(accessed February
2018)) .
So far, little attempt has been made to find viable solutionsfor
valuing NTFP traditional livelihoods, limiting the scope
forassessing one of the most prominent land use issues in
thetropics. The conundrum is how to reconcile socio
economicdevelopment with forest conservation. Creating
synergiesbetween RES and NTFP extractivist activities could promote
thisagenda. RES and extractivist activities build upon the
naturaland cultural qualities that are intrinsic to the core,
biodiverse,Amazon forest.
Initiatives to promote ecotourism (associated with experiencesin
the wild), CBT-community based tourism (associated withinvolvement
of tourists in activities of daily lives of communities)and
community tourism (providing knowledge on local livelihoodsbut not
embedding tourists into indigenous life styles) in the Ama-zon have
expanded over the past 20 years, involving an increasingnumber of
forest families (Section 3.2). Acquiring meaningful val-ues for
these services is problematic because data on RES and tour-ism
development initiatives is scattered across differentinstitutions.
Mapping productivity and rents associated withextractivist
livelihoods also face similar difficulties. In order to fillin this
gap, our study provides both i) a global overview of tourismand
extractivist dynamics in the Brazilian Amazon, and ii) a
com-prehensive review of the relevant case study literature
exploringthe links between RES and the benefits for human wellbeing
inNTFP extractivist landscapes also in the Brazilian Amazon.
Ourmajor research questions are:
1. How much are RES/tourism and extractivist activities of
rubberand Brazil nut geographically differentiated across the
BrazilianAmazon?
2. Are there significant differences between the rents of Brazil
nutand rubber across the different types RES/tourism classes?
3. What evidence do we have about the links betweenRES/tourism
and the benefits for human wellbeing in NTFPextractivist landscapes
in Brazilian Amazon?
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
http://csr.ufmg.br/pecuaria/pdf/contexto.pdfhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
2 A local merchant that goes to the collectors villages to buy
the nuts and works asintermediate agent in the chain.
S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx 3
2. Methods
Our methodology comprised a broad scale assessment of
theRES/tourism and NTFP extractivist activities in the Brazilian
Ama-zon (2.1) followed by a comprehensive review of case study
evi-dence (2.2). Because recreational activities in the Amazon
andtheir associated recreational ecosystem services (RES) are
linkedto overnight stays we used the concepts of RES and tourism
simi-larly although we are aware they are conceptually
different.
2.1. Associations between RES and NTFP extractivist
activities
We compiled data available on RES (Section 2.1.1) and on
NTFPextractivist activities (2.1.2) in the Brazilian Amazon. We
then usedspatially explicit modelling for estimating rents or net
incomes ofthese activities, and we conducted statistical analyses
to explorewhether or not there were associations between tourism
cate-gories and income of NTFPs for the whole area of the
BrazilianAmazon.
2.1.1. Spatially explicit assessment of the role of tourism in
theBrazilian Amazon
We compiled tourism legislation (S1) and available data at
thebiome scale. We found that there is no data available as to the
dif-ferent types of tourism and we could not, at the biome scale,
distin-guish between CBT and other tourism segments. We therefore
usedtwo main sources to collect data on (undifferentiated) tourism
ini-tiatives in the Amazon. The first was the Map of the Brazilian
Tour-ist Regions (http://www.mapa.turismo.gov.br/mapa/)
(accessedJanuary 2018), made available by the Ministry of
Tourism(MTUR, 2016). This dataset contains information by
municipalityon tourism according to three variables: number of
lodging estab-lishments; number of formal jobs in the hospitality
sector, andtourism demand (both national and international). The
categoriza-tion is composed of five classes (A, B, C, D and E),
where each wasassigned numbers as attributes (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5).
The second datasource used is the online database of Tourism Social
Information(named Relação Anual de Informações Sociais – RAIS)
compliedby the Ministry of Labor and Employment (MTE –
http://pdet.mte.-gov.br/) (accessed January 2018). The information
available isdivided into three categories: annual rent of employees
in thelodging sector, number of employees, and number of
establish-ments. We selected only data associated with rents of
employeesin the lodging sector, and avoided data that may include
daily jour-neys often done for business. The database was based on
‘‘RAISEstablishments” and ‘‘RAIS Links”, according to the activity
sector‘‘Código de Atividade Econômica – CNAE 2.0 Class”, starting
from2006. This was calculated through the arithmetic mean of the
indi-vidual income for the reference month, converted into
minimumBrazilian wages of the base year (S2). This estimate was
subse-quently converted from reais (R$) to dollar (US$), using a
conver-sion factor of 2.36 (base year of 2015).
2.1.2. Spatially explicit assessment of the role of NTFP
extractivistactivities in the Brazilian Amazon
In the Brazilian Amazon, traditional communities collect
andtrade a vast number of NTFP products. The Brazilian
statisticsoffice, IBGE (Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e
Estatística), system-atically collects data on a range of 30 NTFP
(Estatística, 2015). Bra-zil nut collection and rubber extraction
are the two main NTFP;together they provide incomes for a large
number of forest com-munities (Ferreira, 2008). We selected these
two NTFP becausethey are marketed, their collection is widespread
across the Ama-zon, and data are available for them from case
material in Acre(Jaramillo-Giraldo et al., 2017; Nunes et al.,
2012). We coupled
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
biophysical and economic spatially explicit models for
estimatingincomes or annual rents (US$ ha�1year�1) for Brazil nut
and rubbercollection as follows:
Rentj ¼ ðQxy � PnÞ � ðQxy � CTprdnÞ � ðQxy � CtrndzÞÞ ð1Þ
Where: Qxy is the simulated production for a cell with
coordinates(x,y) in kg�1ha�1; Pn and CTprdn correspond
respectively, to sellingprice and cost of production in US$/kg of
product n and cost of sec-ondary transportation (Ctrn) in US$/kg of
product n by means (dz)from the location (x,y) to the nearest
cooperative.
In order to simulate production (Qxy), we first used the
weightsof evidence (W of E) method (Bonham-Carter, 1994) for
estimatingthe spatial determinants of the productivity of Brazil
nut and rub-ber based on bioclimatic and production data (S3). The
output ofthe W of E is a favorability of productivity map.
Favorability wasthen transformed into yields by applying a
probability densityfunction (PDF) transformation, so that the new
distributionmatched the yield PDF from the case study areas in Acre
forrubber (Jaramillo-Giraldo et al., 2017) and Brazil nut(Nunes et
al., 2012) (S3).
The price paid to extractivists (Pxy) varies greatly depending
onthe year and season. The price also depends on the
marketinvolved, namely whether it is marketed through
cooperatives(approximately US$ 1.48) or intermediaries2 (price
varies from US$ 1.06 to 1.90 per kg), and depending on the data
source used (e.g.IBGE (Estatística, 2015) or CONAB (Companhia
Nacional deAbastecimento, 2012). IBGE data are self-stated by
producers whileCONAB is the observed production at the cooperative
gate. It is pos-sible that IBGE data are lower than the actual
evidence as extrac-tivists need to pay taxes for their
transactions. On the contrary, atthe cooperative, CONAB pays the
minimum guaranteed price soextractivists are more likely to report
real production and prices.
We used the maximum price paid to collectors in the period2013
to 2014 (Table 1 here) from the CONAB dataset. A
detaileddescription of transport (Ctrn_dz) used to estimate the
annual rentper hectare for a specific forest plot is given in
SupplementaryMaterial (S4).
2.1.3. Associations between tourism and NTFP extractivist
activitiesAs described in Section 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 we estimated
annual net
rent (gross rent-costs of production) thereafter called income,
fortourism and NTFP extractivist activities. While annual income
fromtourism is based on average per household (US$/
household),annual income from Brazil nut and rubber are provided on
a perha basis (US$. ha�1year). For exploring whether or not there
weredifferences of incomes from NTFP across the municipalities
fromdifferent tourism development classes we conducted non
paramet-ric statistical test (Kruskal Wallis).
2.2. Reviewing case study data on RES and extractivist
livelihoods inBrazilian Amazon
We reviewed the literature on tourism initiatives and on
extrac-tivist experiences in the Brazilian Amazon by compiling a
databaseof 17 case studies (S5). In each case study we looked for:
i) evi-dence about the links between RES and benefits to human
wellbe-ing of traditional communities and tourists, ii) major
challengesthat those extractivist communities face when developing
recre-ational activities. A reference for community-based tourism
(CBT)in Brazilian Amazon is the state of Amazonas. We used this
statefor a deeper analyses of case studies. The case study
analysiswas based on data drawn from the management plans of
the
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
http://www.mapa.turismo.gov.br/mapa/http://pdet.mte.gov.br/http://pdet.mte.gov.br/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
Table 2Class of tourism development and its representativeness
in Northern Amazon.
Category Classes of tourism development N N / total classified
(%)
A 1 8 2,3B 2 8 2,6C 3 48 15,5D 4 212 68,9E 5 33 10,7Total 309
100
Table 1Market price (paid to extractivists) for Brazil nut and
rubber.
State Market price (US$) per kg
Brazil Nut Rubber
Acre 1.42 0.80Amapá 1.42 1.09Amazonas 1.77 1.09Pará 1.85
1.21Maranhão 0.85 1.09Mato Grosso 0.85 1.25Tocantins 0.85
1.09Rondônia 0.85 1.12
4 S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx
conservation units in the State of Amazonas as well as
institutionaland governmental reports and nongovernmental
organizations,such as the Amazon Sustainable Foundation (FAS, 2016)
and theInstitute of Sustainable Development Mamirauá (IDSM, 2011)
(S5).
3. Results
3.1. Broad scale analysis of the association between RES/tourism
andNTFP extractivist activities in the Brazilian Amazon
We conducted the analysis in all the 9 States of Brazilian
Ama-zon over an area of 4.182.473.415 km2 comprising 551
municipal-ities. From these only 309 municipalities (56%) were
classified bythe Ministry of Tourism (MTUR) (Table 2). Major
tourism activitiesconsistent with nature conservation in the
Brazilian Amazon are:1) ecotourism-accommodation in ‘‘eco-lodges”,
often in proximityto parks or sustainable development reserves,
where major activi-ties compose tracking, birdwatching; 2) cruises
on the Amazonriver and its tributaries; 3) sports fishing (often in
combinationwith 1) and 2); and 4) community based tourism-
promoting con-tact with traditional communities, participation in
cultural events(e.g., folk festivals). Although these are the
principal categories, wewere not able to find quantitative
estimates of the representative-ness of each one of the tourism
segments (ecotourism vs CBT) ingovernmental databases (e.g. MTUR).
Thus we were not able toassess at the scale of the Brazilian Amazon
differences amongsttourism types. This was only assessed through
the case studies(Section 3.2). We know that CBT is considered an
alternativetourism segment because tourism in Amazon has been
mainlyassociated with ecotourism (May, 2015). While a
considerablenumber of tourism initiatives focus on ecotourism (May,
2015),the undertaking of CBT has been slow despite its potential to
valuethe human aspects of the extractivist landscapes and to
fulfillgrowing niche markets of tourists that value traditional
ecologicalknowledge and traditional cultures.
Those undifferentiated tourism segments are classified by
theMinistry of Tourism according to development stages ranging
fromwell established (A-category 1) to the incipient (E-category
5)(Table 2). In total, MTUR reports 309 cases of tourist
initiatives inlegal Amazon, the majority (95%) in the less
developed stage(classes C, D e E).
Classes 1 and 2 of tourism development involve large numbersof
people employed in the sector, and large numbers of
tourismestablishments. These are able to attract national and
internationaltourists, implying that tourism has strong
representativeness inthe local economy. The municipalities where
tourism is well-established have lower representativeness in the
Northern Amazon(4.9%). On the other hand, class 3 and 4, in which
tourism makes amedium to low contribution to the local economy,
have the largestrepresentation (approximately 85%). Finally, class
5 tourism isbarely present as an economic activity; this is found
in only 10%of the cases in the Amazon.
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
The spatial distribution of tourism initiatives from the
MTURdatabase shows that the higher classes of tourism
developmentare located around the cities of Manaus and Belem, since
theseregions have better access and infrastructures for
accommodatingtourists (Fig. 1). Accessibility and the presence of
local capacitiesand skills are fundamental for determining whether
tourism cancontribute to reducing deforestation and promoting
social inclu-sion in one of the poorest and environmentally
problematicregions of Brazil (Hoefle, 2016). An exception is four
municipalitieswhere tourism average rents range from US$ 800 to
US$1100 perhousehold. In the remainder municipalities across the 9
states ofAmazon average rents from tourism vary from US$ 200 to
US$400 per household (Figs. 2 (A, B) and 3).
As for NTFP extractivist activities, the models show that in
areaswith higher productivity of Brazil nut (hotspots) with yields
�30kg ha�1year�1, rents may reach up to US$ 46 ha�1year�1, whilethe
average rent is US$ 5.05 ± 7.49 ha�1year�1 (Fig. 1). On otherhand,
in rubber extraction areas with yields above the mean(yields � 3.53
kg ha�1year�1), and where there are governmentalsubsidies, rents
average US$ 0.56 ± 0.7 ha�1year�1. This meansthat, in the actual
circumstances, and for these two productswhose prices for
commodities are established in global markets,extractivist
livelihoods are barely possible.
Fig. 1 shows that, at a broad scale of analysis, tourism and
NTFPextractivist activities rarely spatially overlap, suggesting
that syn-ergies between tourism and extractivism are scarce.
We further assessed if there were significant differences
onrents across the tourism development classes. We found that
onlyrents from tourism are statistically significant (p � 0.001) in
suchcomparisons, while there is no significant differences of
Brazilnut rents (p = 0.41) and rubber (p = 0.61) (Fig. 2) this
reinforcingthat in the Brazilian Amazon synergies between tourism
and NTFPextractivist activities are extremely rare.
3.2. Review of case studies
In order to further disentangle the association between
tourismand NTFP extractivist activities we undertook a qualitative
analysisof the different case studies. This review of the
management plansof 17 conservation units (UC- Unidades de
Conservação) in the stateof Amazonas (S5) showed that activities
such as tourism and NTFPextractivist activities coexist in
different socio productive arrange-ments. We found that about 35%
of the conservation units (UCs)currently develop community tourism
alongside extractivist activ-ities. Also 25% of the communities
studied believed that CBT couldbe a more valuable activity in the
near future (RDS Rio Amapá, RDSPurunga – Conquista, Maués State
Forest, RDS Piagaçu-Purus,RESEX Catuá-Ipixuna and APA Rio Negro).
25% of the conservationunits (UCs) do not make any mention of CBT
or any other type oftourism in their management plans (RDS Rio
Madeira, RDS doJuma, RDS Canumã, RDS Cujubim, RESEX Uacari and
RESEX RioGregório). Finally, 15% of the UCs rely exclusively on
NTFP extrac-tivist activities (RDS Rio Madeira, RESEX Uacari and
RESEX RioGregório).
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
Fig. 1. Associations between rents from rubber (A) and Brazil
nut (B) and tourism development classes.
S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx 5
This review of case studies show that activities such as
tourismand NTFP extractivism can coexist in the Brazilian Amazon
munic-ipalities either though multifunctionality or segregation.
Fig. 3shows one case where there is multifunctionality (Tefé), and
oneexample of segregation (Novo Aripuana) of activities (see Fig.
4).
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
In the municipality of Tefé, the headquarters of the
lodgingUacari, average monthly rents from tourism range from US$
250to 280 year�1, while from rubber ranges US$ 1 to 2
ha�1.year�1
and nut range from US$ 0 to 15 ha�1.year�1. In other
municipali-ties, such as Novo Aripuanã, the local economy is mainly
based
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
Fig. 2. Associations between rents from Tourism (A), Brazil nut
(B) and rubber (C) across different tourism development
classes.
6 S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx
on extractivist activities. These two municipalities, Tefé and
NovoAripuanã, are analysed in detail. The former is an example of a
suc-cessful approach to tourism and extractivism as a common
liveli-hood strategy, while in the latter focuses on extractivist
activities.
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
Our work shows that most of the case studies where
multifunc-tionality of tourism and extractivist activities occur
are included inthe upper classes of tourism development (1, 2 and
3). At the casestudy scale we can see that where rents from NTFP
are low,
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
Fig. 3. Two case studies: Tefé and Novo Aripuanã, rents from
Brazil nut, rubber and tourism.
Fig. 4. Gross National Product of Tefé and Novo Aripuanã
municipalities from 2010 to 2014.
S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx 7
communities are more likely to develop tourism initiatives to
com-plement income. Alongside the RDS Amanã, the RDS Mamirauá,
inthe municipality of Tefé, is the Mamirauá Institute of
SustainableDevelopment (MISD), created more than 20 years ago. MISD
islocated at the confluence of the Japurá and Solimões rivers.
TheMISD is a non-profit social organization considered a model
ofcommunity based tourism in Brazil. Many members of the
localassociation work in Uacari, embracing the tourist sector
throughaccounting, marketing and sales. Tourism forms the basis of
theeconomy of the 177 communities (FAS, 2016), which make upthe RDS
Mamirauá. Alongside community based tourism, incomeis also created
from activities such as fishing, wood extractionand agriculture.
RES offered in this lodge include packages from3 to 7 days for
about 20 people (10 private suites). The visitor isoffered
experiences of the traditional lifestyles including how tolive in a
flooded area. According to the case study data, in contrastto what
is registered in national accounts (RAIS) and shown inFig. 3, the
rent here is US$ 753 (Peralta, 2012). Major extractivistactivities
are fishery and collection of NTFPs (andiroba andcopaiba). In this
case often tourism and extractivist activities enjoya temporal
multifunctionality. One occurs in the rainy season andthe other in
the dry season.
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
In comparison, the RDS Juma, in the municipality of
NovoAripuanã, is co-managed by the State of Conservation Units of
theSecretary of State for Environment and Sustainable Developmentof
Amazonas and the Sustainable Amazonas Foundation (FAS).The mindset
behind the administration of the RDS is based onsocio-ecological
systems, in which agriculture, fishing, fruitcollection,
extractivism of Brazil nuts and the oil of Copaíba arethe main
economic activities developed in the reserve. In 2008,the main
extractive product was the Brazil nut with a productionof 1,086
tons, placing themunicipality of Novo Aripuanã as the thirdlargest
producer of this resource in the Amazon state. In this
reservearound 600 kg of rubber was collected annually (FAS, 2010).
Forthese two municipalities, we compared both Human
DevelopmentIndex (HDI) and Gross National Product (GNP) per
capita.
The municipality of Tefé, has the highest GNP per capita
aroundUS$ 3700. This is in comparison with the municipality of
NovoAripuanã, with a mean around US$ 2,200. Here we note that
aneconomy based on more than one income activity can enhancelocal
economy. This development has effects also on Human Devel-opment
Index (HDI) encompassing three basic dimensions ofhuman
development: income, education and health (PNUD,2017). HDI in Tefé
is medium while in Novo Aripuanã is low.
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
8 S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx
Other remarkable examples of RES-extractivist activities
multi-functional livelihoods are the RESEX Pedras Negras managed
bythe Association of Rubber Tappers of the Aguapé Valley and
othernongovernmental organizations. Jointly collecting rubber and
tour-ism activities, 14 families in this RESEX increased their
income byapproximately US$80 per year (Peralta, 2012). The lodging
Pousadados Lagos, in the municipality of Silves about 300 km
fromManaus,is a community-based ecotourism enterprise that was
built in 1994based on a project by a nongovernmental organization
calledAssociação de Silves para a Preservação Ambiental e Cultural,
withtechnical support from World Wildlife Foundation
(WWF_Brasil),sponsored by Government of Austria. This initiative
was one ofthe first to implement community based tourism in the
BrazilianAmazon (Turismo, 2012). The main goal is to preserve the
lakesand the riverside livelihoods. Major extractivist activities
are fish-ery and the collection of the essence of ‘‘Pau Rosa”, a
fixer in thewell known perfume ‘‘Chanel n. 5”. Annual income from
communi-ties that are involved with tourism (US$ 1.180) are above
the onesbased on extractive livelihoods alone (US$ 830) (Becker and
Lena,2002).
The survey of case studies also reveals that communities
com-bining community tourism jointly with NTFP extractivist
activitiesare not restricted to the conservation units (UCs). About
15 com-munities (e.g. Iranduba, Careiro da Várzea, Rio Preto da
Eva, Silves)of the Metropolitan Region of Manaus (MRM)), recognize
tourismas an important income generating activity alongside
handcrafts(30%), fishing (28%) and agriculture (24%). This case
study analysisallows us to assess the challenges and opportunities
for tourismactivity in extractivist landscapes (Table 3).
4. Discussion and conclusions
Tourism is a major economic player for sustainable develop-ment.
It is also inherently linked to cultural values that
providewell-being to the local community. Our results show that,
thereis a very weak association between rents from tourism and
NTFP
Table 3Major challenges and opportunities for tourism segments
in extractivist landscapes.
Segment PossibleContributionOf Tourism
Links Between RES And Benefits HumanWell Being
Major C
Communities Tourists Commu
Eco tourism Increase anddiversifyincome;Environmentaland
culturalpreservation;Economicgrowth
Value ‘‘StandingForests”; Addingvalue to
theterritorialenvironmental andintangible values offorests
Close to natureexperiences;Environmentaleducation andvalue.
Ability tactivitie
CommunityBasedTourism
Opportunity tomodify andrenew socialsystemsenhancing selfesteem
ofcommunities
Landscape Identity;Empowerment;Creates livingspaces and
humanrelations; Recognizetraditionalknowledge andways of life;
andembrace those waysof life and keep thetraditions
Learning valuesskills, practicesand localknowledge; Life
incommunity andexchange ofexperiences;Stimulateculturally
andspiritually leisureactivities
Requireforms omanageplanninefficientOrganizthe comFamiliesto the
pMaintaibenefitslevel; Dsharedpartner
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
extractivist activities at the biome scale (Figs. 1 and 2). The
analysisof case studies further suggests that in the few cases
where thereare multifunctional livelihoods (most of the cases
involve temporalmultifunctionality as one activity is on the rainy
and other in thedry season) tourism and NTFP extractivist
activities complementeach other (Fig. 3). The review of the 17 land
management plansof conservation units in the Amazonas (S5) show
that so fartourism is seen as a complement to increase extractivist
rents.However we found that one of the bigger contributions of
tourismin extractivist landscapes is likely to be the recreational
ecosystemservices which foster the cultural values of traditional
livelihoods.These have been fighting against the steady expansion
of thecowboy imagery and lifestyle.
Our study suggests that although associations between tourismand
extractivist activities are weak at the Brazilian Amazon
scale(where there are no significant differences of rents of Brazil
nutand rubber across the tourism development classes (Fig. 2)),
atthe case study level the development of new tourism
opportunitiescan promote positive changes in the social and
economic localstructures of forest people, particularly in the
context of extrac-tivist landscapes. Contrary to the conclusion of
Hoefle (2016),who claimed that ‘‘tourism will not save Amazon
forests”, weargue that segments such as community based tourism
mightbecome embedded in a multifunctional livelihoods and as
suchcould add value to the Amazonian extractivist landscapes.
Forexample, value can be added to the Brazil nut chain, since its
pro-cessing, such as cereal bar, oil and chestnut milk, can
contribute toa variety of consumer benefits. The process itself has
the potentialto become a commercialized product.
Likewise, when coupling community based tourism and
extrac-tivism, some communities can sell the product and welcome
theconsumer of the product as a tourist. In addition to this
doublegain, benefits can be triple when it reduces the costs of
movingproduct to retail outlets (S4), as well as quadruple
whenextractivists are not subject to extortionist inroads of
traders mak-ing unreasonable profits as presently prevails in the
rubber and
hallenges Source
nities ONGs Governmentalbodies
o diversifys;
Establishingbusinessadministrationpractices.
Dealing with theproblem ‘‘The morepopular eco-toourism
becomes,the less likely it is toprotect theresources that arethe
object ofvisitation
(May, 2015; Mayet al., 2013)(Sampaio, 2005)
s alternativef tourismment andg to be;ation insidemunity;’
adherencerograms;n touristat the localevelopbusinessships
Expansion ofknowledge andconceptions aboutplanning
andempowerment oflocal communitiesand the union ofdifferent
actors;Guidingcommunities inpreparation toreceive tourists;Capacity
buildingeducation andcommunitynetwork
Focusing on theSocial organizationof traditionalcommunities
andpopulations;Partnerships aspublic–private andONGs dedicated
tothe empowermentof the communitiesthrough forestmanagement andthe
practice oftourism
(Hernández-Morcillo et al.,2013; Lapan, 2014;Alhroot,
2012;Ruiz-Ballesterosand Hernández-Ramírez, 2010;Sampaio
andCoriolano, 2009;Coutinho et al.,2015)
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx 9
Brazil nut NTFP chain (Gomes, 2009; Gomes et al., 2012;
Hecht,2013; Homma, 2008).
Yet even in cases where there are company communityarrangements,
where ‘‘higher” prices are paid to communities(Morsello, 2006;
Morsello et al., 2014), outcomes from NTFPmarket chains are mixed
and reveal complex economic and socialpatterns. If extractivist
activities and tourism can be coupled mul-tifuntionally, we believe
local communities will have an incentiveto go beyond the cattle
ranching ideology.
Our broad scale analysis reveals that the evidence of joint
liveli-hoods is scanty. We expose an urgent need to forge new
livelihoodoptions that complement forest conservation. Tourism,
particularlyCBT and extractivism, can complement each other as a
part of acontribution to sustainable development. But this needs to
beimplemented through a spatially explicit targeted approach. Aswe
showed in Fig. 1, even in the areas shaded in red that alreadyhave
well established market chains of NTFP and access to markets,the
positive connections between tourism and extractivism are notin
place and remains difficult to develop. In our opinion,
effortsshould be devoted to nurture multifunctional livelihoods in
placeswhere rents from extractivism are lower (shaded from blue
toyellow) where tourism dynamics can add value to
traditionallivelihoods. In these places we need to be aware that
when placingcommunity based tourism into the dynamics of forest
peoplesgains are likely to be more social (e.g. self-esteem) rather
thaneconomic.
There are few studies assessing the economic benefits of
tour-ism in Brazilian Amazon. A global study sponsored by the
programon forests (PROFOR) and the Waves program from World
Bank,using meta-analysis and a spatially explicit regression,
estimatesthat tourism average rents in forest areas in Brazil is of
US$14ha�1 yr�1 (estimating that 10% of the forests are used to
recreationpurposes), while according to the same study rents for
NTFPs are ofUS$ 6.5 ha�1 yr�1 (PROFOR, 2015). Other estimates vary
widely. Forexample Andersen (1997) cited by May et al. (2013)
estimated thatthe recreational value of Amazon rainforests biome
range from US$53 per ha (discount rate of 6%) to US$ 160 per ha
(discount rate 2%).Other studies report rents from tourism in
Ecuador to be US$ 0.66ha�1 yr�1 (May, 2015). While there are data
from case studies inPeru (Kirkby et al., 2010), for Brazil, we
could only find a broad esti-mate that the contribution of nature
tourism to the Brazilian GDPis as modest as 0.3% (May, 2015).
CBT, even as a small-scale economic activity carried out
byindigenous or riverside communities, enhances
recreationalecosystem services provided by the forest. Such
tourism, canembrace the ways of life of the local Amazonian
population with-out taking advantage of cultural norms. This may
have a beneficialimpact on the extractive activities of the
recipient communities.This type of tourism is associated with
environmental education,where the values and ways of life,
production and knowledge ofthe communities, are better understood
and respected (Sampaioand Coriolano, 2009; Sampaio, 2005). This is
already occurring inthe state of Amazonas, where environmental
preservation andcultural values of the riverside communities are
being combined.In these cases reported beneficial changes include
heightenedself-esteem and greater community organization. The
participationof more families into such programs can surely lead to
overallimproved management of the forest.
In the literature review we also found cases in which tourismmay
not be environmentally friendly (May, 2015). The more popu-lar
tourism becomes, the lesser it is likely to protect the
resourcesthat are the attraction. In a study of three Amazon
ecotourismprojects, May (2015) looks at how local leaders viewed
changesassociated with ecotourism for their communities.
Economicbenefits were mentioned, but so were new restrictions on
time,decreased personal and communal reciprocity, and social
conflict.
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
CBT, ecotourism and community tourism are established prac-tices
in the Brazilian Amazon. Yet their contribution to wellbeingis
limited to a small set of successful case studies that do notextend
beyond the municipalities involved. The rich body ofknowledge
gathered in the last 20 years by nongovernmentalorganizations and
government institutions offers the basis for amore effective
participatory approach. Poignantly, around the cor-ner is an
ominously expanding cattle economy which in the shortrun provides
tantalizing incomes well above the typical mix ofmore sustainable
activities studied here. We urge a more proactiveaction towards our
findings to show that effective multifunctional-ity on a
sustainable basis can better the livelihoods of Amazonsacross the
biome.
Acknowledgments
We are thankful to CNPq-Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvi-mento
Científico e Tecnológico for theYoung Talent
Scholarship300013/2015-9, Science Without Borders Program, as well
asWorld Bank via Norad who sponsored the project ‘‘Economic
Valu-ation of Changes in the Amazon Forest area.
http://csr.ufmg.br/amazones/.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found,
inthe online version, at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016.
References
Alhroot, A.H., 2012. An evaluation of social marketing in
humanitarian tourismrequirements by using social networking sites.
Int. J. Marketing Stud. 4, 8.
Balvanera, P., Uriarte, M., Almeida-Leñero, L., Altesor, A.,
DeClerck, F., Gardner, T.,Hall, J., Lara, A., Laterra, P.,
Peña-Claros, M., Silva Matos, D.M., Vogl, A.L.,Romero-Duque, L.P.,
Arreola, L.F., Caro-Borrero, Á.P., Gallego, F., Jain, M.,
Little,C., de Oliveira Xavier, R., Paruelo, J.M., Peinado, J.E.,
Poorter, L., Ascarrunz, N.,Correa, F., Cunha-Santino, M.B.,
Hernández-Sánchez, A.P., Vallejos, M., 2012.Ecosystem services
research in Latin America: The state of the art. EcosystemServices
2, 56–70.
Becker, B., Lena, P., 2002. Pequenos empreendimentos
alternativos na Amazônia.Setembro, 2002. Disponível em:
http://www.ie.ufrj.br/redesist/NTF2/NT%20Bertha-Philippe.PDF.
Acesso em: 4/dez/2017.
Bonham-Carter, G., 1994. Geographic Information Systems for
Geoscientists:Modelling with GIS. Pergamon, Oxford, UK.
Bowman, M.S., Soares-Filho, B.S., Merry, F.D., Nepstad, D.C.,
Rodrigues, H., Almeida,O.T., 2012. Persistence of cattle ranching
in the Brazilian Amazon: a spatialanalysis of the rationale for
beef production. Land Use Policy 29, 558–568.
Companhia Nacional de Abastecimento, M.d.A.P.e.A.C., 2012
Castanha do Brazil,conjuntura mensal.
Coutinho, G.C.T.P., Sampaio, C.A.C., Rodrigues, L.d.P., 2015
Fatores Motivacionais eImpactos Sociais do Turista Comunitário
Revista Iberoamericana de Turismo –RITUR 4, 77-87.
Estatística, I.B.d.G.e., 2015 Produção da Extração Vegetal e da
SilviculturaFAS, F.A.S., 2010. Plano de Gestão da Reserva de
Desenvolvimento Sustentável do
Juma, Novo Aripuanã, Amazonas p. 228.FAS, F.A.S., 2016.
Relatório de Atividades 2015, Relatórios de Gestão da FAS,
Manaus,
p. 120.Ferreira, L.T., 2008. A seringueira no brasil.
Biotecnologia Ciência &
Desenvolvimento.Gomes, C.V.A., 2009. Twenty years after Chico
Mendes:Extractive Reserves’s
Expansion, catle adoption and evolving self definition among
rubber tappersin the Brazilian Amazon UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA.
Gomes, C.V.A., Vadjunec, J.M., Perz, S.G., 2012. Rubber tapper
identities: Political-economic dynamics, livelihood shifts, and
environmental implications in achanging Amazon. Geoforum 43,
260–271.
Hecht, S., 2013. In the realm of rubber, The scrumble for the
Amazon and the lostparadise of Euclides da Cunha. The University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Hernández-Morcillo, M., Plieninger, T., Bieling, C., 2013. An
empirical review ofcultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecolog.
Indicators 29, 434–444.
Hoefle, S.W., 2016. Multi-functionality, juxtaposition and
conflict in the CentralAmazon: will tourism contribute to rural
livelihoods and save the rainforest? J.Rural Stud. 44, 24–36.
Homma, A.K.O., 2008. Extrativismo, Biodiversidade e Biopirataria
na Amazônia.EMBRAPA, Texto para Discussão 27, ISSN 1677-5473.
Humphries, S., Holmes, T.P., Kainer, K., Koury, C.G.G., Cruz,
E., de Miranda Rocha, R.,2012. Are community-based forest
enterprises in the tropics financially viable?Case studies from the
Brazilian Amazon. Ecolog. Econ. 77, 62–73.
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0005http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0010http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0020http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0020http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0025http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0025http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0025http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0065http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0070http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0070http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0075http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0075http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0080http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0080http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0080http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0090http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0090http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0090https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
-
10 S.M. Carvalho Ribeiro et al. / Ecosystem Services xxx (2018)
xxx–xxx
IDSM, I.d.D.S.M., 2011. Protocolo para Gestão de Recursos
Turísticos Baseado naExperiência do IDSM junto à Pousada Uacari e à
Associação de Auxiliares eGuias de Ecoturismo de Mamirauá – AAGEMAM
– RDS Mamirauá – AM. Tefé –AM, dezembro de 2011.
Jaramillo-Giraldo, C., Soares Filho, B., Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M.,
Gonçalves, R.C., 2017. Isit possible to make rubber extraction
ecologically and economically viable inthe Amazon? The southern
acre and chico mendes reserve case study. Ecolog.Econ. 134,
186–197.
Kirkby, C.A., Giudice-Granados, R., Day, B., Turner, K.,
Velarde-Andrade, L.M.,Dueñas-Dueñas, A., Lara-Rivas, J.C., Yu,
D.W., 2010. The market triumph ofecotourism: an economic
investigation of the private and social benefits ofcompeting land
uses in the peruvian Amazon. PLoS ONE 5, e13015.
Lapan, C.M., 2014. Communitarian Micro-entrepreneurship and
Gender in the MayaTouristscape, Graduate Faculty. North Carolina
State University, Raleigh, NorthCarolina, p. 172.
Levis, C., Costa, F.R.C., Bongers, F., Peña-Claros, M., Clement,
C.R., Junqueira, A.B.,Neves, E.G., Tamanaha, E.K., Figueiredo,
F.O.G., Salomão, R.P., Castilho, C.V.,Magnusson, W.E., Phillips,
O.L., Guevara, J.E., Sabatier, D., Molino, J.-F., López, D.C.,
Mendoza, A.M., Pitman, N.C.A., Duque, A., Vargas, P.N., Zartman,
C.E.,Vasquez, R., Andrade, A., Camargo, J.L., Feldpausch, T.R.,
Laurance, S.G.W.,Laurance, W.F., Killeen, T.J., Nascimento, H.E.M.,
Montero, J.C., Mostacedo, B.,Amaral, I.L., Guimarães Vieira, I.C.,
Brienen, R., Castellanos, H., Terborgh, J.,Carim, M.d.J.V.,
Guimarães, J.R.d.S., Coelho, L.d.S., Matos, F.D.d.A., Wittmann,
F.,Mogollón, H.F., Damasco, G., Dávila, N., García-Villacorta, R.,
Coronado, E.N.H.,Emilio, T., Filho, D.d.A.L., Schietti, J., Souza,
P., Targhetta, N., Comiskey, J.A.,Marimon, B.S., Marimon, B.-H.,
Neill, D., Alonso, A., Arroyo, L., Carvalho, F.A., deSouza, F.C.,
Dallmeier, F., Pansonato, M.P., Duivenvoorden, J.F., Fine,
P.V.A.,Stevenson, P.R., Araujo-Murakami, A., Aymard C., G.A.,
Baraloto, C., do Amaral, D.D., Engel, J., Henkel, T.W., Maas, P.,
Petronelli, P., Revilla, J.D.C., Stropp, J., Daly,D., Gribel, R.,
Paredes, M.R., Silveira, M., Thomas-Caesar, R., Baker, T.R., da
Silva,N.F., Ferreira, L.V., Peres, C.A., Silman, M.R., Cerón, C.,
Valverde, F.C., Di Fiore, A.,Jimenez, E.M., Mora, M.C.P., Toledo,
M., Barbosa, E.M., Bonates, L.C.d.M.,Arboleda, N.C., Farias,
E.d.S., Fuentes, A., Guillaumet, J.-L., Jørgensen, P.M.,Malhi, Y.,
de Andrade Miranda, I.P., Phillips, J.F., Prieto, A., Rudas, A.,
Ruschel, A.R., Silva, N., von Hildebrand, P., Vos, V.A., Zent,
E.L., Zent, S., Cintra, B.B.L.,Nascimento, M.T., Oliveira, A.A.,
Ramirez-Angulo, H., Ramos, J.F., Rivas, G.,Schöngart, J., Sierra,
R., Tirado, M., van der Heijden, G., Torre, E.V., Wang, O.,Young,
K.R., Baider, C., Cano, A., Farfan-Rios, W., Ferreira, C., Hoffman,
B.,Mendoza, C., Mesones, I., Torres-Lezama, A., Medina, M.N.U., van
Andel, T.R.,Villarroel, D., Zagt, R., Alexiades, M.N., Balslev, H.,
Garcia-Cabrera, K., Gonzales,T., Hernandez, L.,
Huamantupa-Chuquimaco, I., Manzatto, A.G., Milliken, W.,Cuenca,
W.P., Pansini, S., Pauletto, D., Arevalo, F.R., Reis, N.F.C.,
Sampaio, A.F.,Giraldo, L.E.U., Sandoval, E.H.V., Gamarra, L.V.,
Vela, C.I.A., ter Steege, H., 2017.Persistent effects of
pre-Columbian plant domestication on Amazonian forestcomposition.
Science 355, 925-931.
May, P., 2015. Tourism Contribution to forest benefits in the
Amazon Basin. In:Bank, W. (Ed.), Peter H. May, PhD, Consultant, The
World Bank, UPI No.00053410.
Please cite this article in press as: Carvalho Ribeiro, S.M., et
al. Can multifuncttimber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse
forests in the Braecoser.2018.03.016
May, P., Soares Filho, B., Strand, J., 2013. HowMuch Is the
AmazonWorth? The Stateof Knowledge Concerning the Value of
Preserving Amazon Rainforests. PolicyResearch Working Paper 6668,
The World Bank Development Research Group,Environment and Energy
Team,
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1018.5013&rep=rep1&type=pdf
(accessedFebruary 2018).
MMA (2009) National plan for Sociobiodiversity chains Plano
Nacional de Promoçaodas Cadeias da Sociobiodiversidade (PNPSB).
Ministry of Environment- MMAMinisterio Meio Ambiente (Brazil).
Morsello, C., 2006. Company–community non-timber forest product
deals in theBrazilian Amazon: a review of opportunities and
problems. Forest Policy Econ.8, 485–494.
Morsello, C., Delgado, J.A.d.S., Fonseca-Morello, T., Brites,
A.D., 2014. Does tradingnon-timber forest products drive
specialisation in products gathered forconsumption? Evidence from
theBrazilianAmazon. Ecolog. .omics 100, 140–149.
MTUR, M.D.T., 2016. Categorização dos Municípios das Regiões
Turísticas do Mapado Turismo Brasileiro.
Nunes, F., Soares-Filho, B., Giudice, R., Rodrigues, H., Bowman,
M., Silvestrini, R.,Mendoza, E., 2012. Economic benefits of forest
conservation: assessing thepotential rents from Brazil nut
concessions in Madre de Dios, Peru, to channelREDD+ investments.
Environ. Conservation.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892911000671.
Peralta, N., 2012. Ecoturismo de base comunitária na Amazônia:
uma análisecomparativa Community-based ecotourism in the Amazon: a
brief comparativeanalysis. Observatório de Inovação do Turismo –
Revista Acadêmica 2, 16.
Peters, C.M., Gentry, A.H., Mendelsohn, R.O., 1989. Valuation of
an Amazonianrainforest. Nature 339, 655–656.
PNUD, 2017. Atlas do Desenvolvimento Humano no BrasilPROFOR,
2015. Global Assessement of Non Wood Forest Ecosystem Services
Spatially explicit meta-analysis and benefit transfer to improve
the WorldBank’s forest weatlh database. In: Siikamäki, J.,
Santiago-Ávila, F.J., Vail, P. (Eds.).
Ruiz-Ballesteros, E., Hernández-Ramírez, M., 2010. Tourism that
Empowers?Commodification and appropriation in Ecuador’s Turismo
Comunitario.Critique Anthropology 30, 29.
Sampaio, C.A.C., 2005. Turismo como fenômeno humano: princípios
para se pensara socioeconomia e sua prática sob a denominação
turismo comunitário.EDUNISC, Santa Cruz do Sul.
Sampaio, C.A.C, Coriolano, L.N.M.T, 2009. Dialogando com
experiências vivenciadasem Marraquech e America Latina para
compreensão do turismo comunitário esolidário. Revista Brasileira
de Pesquisa em Turismo 3, 4–24.
Scoles, R., Gribel, R., 2015. Human Influence on the
Regeneration of the Brazil NutTree (Bertholletia excelsa Bonpl.,
Lecythidaceae) at Capanã Grande Lake,Manicoré, Amazonas. Brazil.
Human Ecology 43, 843–854.
Turismo, A., 2012. Turismo comunitário na Amazônia. Central de
turismoComunitário da Amazonia. Manaus-AM: ICEI Brasil, 40p.
ional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services
(RES) and nonzilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services (2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0100http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0100http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0100http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0100http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0105http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0105http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0105http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0105http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0110http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0110http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0110http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0135http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0135http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0135http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0140http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0140http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0140https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892911000671https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892911000671http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0155http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0155http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0155http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0160http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0160http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0175http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0175http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0175http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0185http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0185http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0185http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0180http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0180http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0180http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0190http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0190http://refhub.elsevier.com/S2212-0416(17)30444-8/h0190https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
Can multifunctional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem
services (RES) and non timber forest products (NTFP) maintain
biodiverse forests in the Brazilian Amazon?1 Introduction2
Methods2.1 Associations between RES and NTFP extractivist
activities2.1.1 Spatially explicit assessment of the role of
tourism in the Brazilian Amazon2.1.2 Spatially explicit assessment
of the role of NTFP extractivist activities in the Brazilian
Amazon2.1.3 Associations between tourism and NTFP extractivist
activities
2.2 Reviewing case study data on RES and extractivist
livelihoods in Brazilian Amazon
3 Results3.1 Broad scale analysis of the association between
RES/tourism and NTFP extractivist activities in the Brazilian
Amazon3.2 Review of case studies
4 Discussion and conclusionsAcknowledgmentsAppendix A
Supplementary dataReferences